What would happen if the Roman Empire simply was non-existent

What would happen if for example the Etruscans had destroyed them early on?
I would like to here everybody else's opinions before thinking more deeply about it, I would assume greece would be much more powerful than today, perhaps the celts (or other group) might have taken a position of power to the north and Carthage might have an incredible grip on the mediterranean. I believe there would probably be no christian or islamic movements and the middle east would have been a power struggle between jews and the hindus, or perhaps a form of paganism would wipe all of these religions out and control europe.
I guess the central question is would there be a position of supreme power in Europe without the Romans.

Anyone's guess. The ebb and flow of history with Rome was influenced a great deal by its decisions.

I doubt the Greeks will dominate - they're too divided. Carthage is a trading power but not enough of a military power. That leaves the Celts or a new power as my guess.

As for religions...pagan something.

willbell said:

What would happen if for example the Etruscans had destroyed them early on?
I would like to here everybody else's opinions before thinking more deeply about it, I would assume greece would be much more powerful than today, perhaps the celts (or other group) might have taken a position of power to the north and Carthage might have an incredible grip on the mediterranean. I believe there would probably be no christian or islamic movements and the middle east would have been a power struggle between jews and the hindus, or perhaps a form of paganism would wipe all of these religions out and control europe.
I guess the central question is would there be a position of supreme power in Europe without the Romans.

Click to expand...

I wonder if a Alexander the Great 2,0 or some local power in Greece would have tried in time to reunite the Koine lands... The local Diadocci, by example? Only, more stable, permanent maybe...


(A related ATL thing - would this, and time passing, would start a Greek-Hellene languageS family in the long run, if the 'Rome' of this world (or more like.. Byzance?) would conquer lands in a more stable version of Alexander's conquests? A true, united Greece and it's Empire?)

The Ubbergeek said:

I wonder if a Alexander the Great 2,0 or some local power in Greece would have tried in time to reunite the Koine lands... The local Diadocci, by example? Only, more stable, permanent maybe...


(A related ATL thing - would this, and time passing, would start a Greek-Hellene languageS family in the long run, if the 'Rome' of this world (or more like.. Byzance?) would conquer lands in a more stable version of Alexander's conquests? A true, united Greece and it's Empire?)

Click to expand...

Seleucus was the closest of the Diadochi to reunite Alexander's empire. He was assassinated by Ptolemy Ceraunos after he conquered Thrace and was preparing to reconquer Macedonia.

The Celts are the most likely Rome 'replacement'. They were a rapidly urbanized, wealthy, advancing society when Caesar rolled into town. Without such an interruption, Celtic civilization will quickly rise to dominate Western Europe.

However, a Celtic Empire, and especially a Mediterranean spanning Celtic Empire, is not necessarily unlikely, but something that will probably require some authorial fiat.

What about the Ptolemaic Kingdom, they ended with Cleopatra, and were assimilated into Rome, as far as I can tell they could have been a regional power, but perhaps their location would have been a problem. Other than the celts and greece (or it components), is there any other regional powers that are on a similar scale? Would a power be able to take control of britain or spain (isolated from the main centres we associate with power in Europe)?
@Elfwine:
I have very little knowledge of greece during this time period, an unfortunate oversight.
@Ubbergeek:
I don't think there was much of a chance of the Greek-Hellene languages becoming a whole family, most families are hard to trace into groups but I think that Indo-European and GH would still be fairly stuck together, I wonder would Basque be able to make a come-back?

willbell said:

What about the Ptolemaic Kingdom, they ended with Cleopatra, and were assimilated into Rome, as far as I can tell they could have been a regional power, but perhaps their location would have been a problem. Other than the celts and greece (or it components), is there any other regional powers that are on a similar scale? Would a power be able to take control of britain or spain (isolated from the main centres we associate with power in Europe)?
@Elfwine:
I have very little knowledge of greece during this time period, an unfortunate oversight.
@Ubbergeek:
I don't think there was much of a chance of the Greek-Hellene languages becoming a whole family, most families are hard to trace into groups but I think that Indo-European and GH would still be fairly stuck together, I wonder would Basque be able to make a come-back?

Click to expand...

Well, I was thinking that if a NeoAlexandrian empire or somethign was established, solid, large and surviving, over age, maybe local 'Low Greek' would appears, and something like by example Romania to Latin could appears...

willbell said:

What about the Ptolemaic Kingdom, they ended with Cleopatra, and were assimilated into Rome, as far as I can tell they could have been a regional power, but perhaps their location would have been a problem.

Click to expand...

The Ptolemies were already weakened by their wars with the Seleucids. If Rome isn't a factor at all in this, I see Egypt being conquered by the Seleucids or the Ptolemaic dynasty being overthrown by an ambitious native Egyptian general down the road.

These are some of my thoughts about the issue:

willbell, there won't be a supreme power in the Mediterranean without the Romans. I mean no single state. Some coalition or even confederation and for a short period of time ( decades at most) is possible though.

To eliminate Carthage was so difficult even for mighty Romans. So it will stay for a very long time domineering Western Africa at least. But I agree with Elfwine that it is more about trading and if there is something like Barcid (Hannibal) Empire it will disintegrate rather soon.

The Ubbergeek, Cuāuhtemōc, local Diadocci could not unite anything in OTL. And it had nothing to do with Rome. So nothing would change for them without Rome in this sense.
But as Seulicid Empire was doing just fine and it was crushed only by Romans I would give it a hundred years more (than in OTL) to live.

MAlexMatt, when 'Caesar rolled into town' Gaul was already overlorded by the Germans of Ariovistus.

So the first to gain without Rome would be the Celts. And then immediately the Germans. The Cumbry and Teutons were a powerful mix of both, but the German element undoubtedly prevailed.
I just do not see who could stop the Germans without Romans.
So in the first century BC the Germans will be strongest in Europe. That won't be a united state or Empire. Nothing like that. Tribes, confederations, merry 'war of everybody against everybody'. All other elements would stay, but weakened. Italy especially would be difficult to control, some local native Italian tribes are very warlike and independent, Marsians for example.

In 1 century AD a mighty Dacia would challenge the German domination in Europe and in an alliance with Sarmataes they would take part of it from them. And that will be a single state, an Empire maybe.

The Eastern Mediterranean would stay as it was without Romans. Macedon is strong enough to protect itself and Greece from the North. As I said Seulicides are fine. I am worried about Ptolemaic Egypt. It could be even conquered by someone else (Seulicides for instance or by Macedon) for some time. They would definitely have some time of trouble and probably change a ruling dynasty.

That's it so far

Russian said:

MAlexMatt, when 'Caesar rolled into town' Gaul was already overlorded by the Germans of Ariovistus.

Click to expand...

A German conquest, where some members of German tribes replace the native Celtic ruling caste with themselves, and a Roman conquest, where millions are slaughtered and a Roman system of political economy is forced on all of Gaul, are two entirely different things.

Celtic civilization would survive a German conquest. It might even thrive.

Celtic civilization didn't really survive the Roman conquest. What emerged on the other side was a Roman civilization that happened to speak Gallic.

Elfwine said:

As for religions...pagan something.

Click to expand...

Christianity would definitely appear. How else?
It is a healthy mix of Jewish inspiration and Greek thought. And we have them both in this TL.
But to baptize the whole of Mediterranean would be much harder.

But as Christianity will appear inside a mighty Seulicid Empire this religion would spread in this empire as it did in the Roman Empire in OTL.
So, in this ATL we'll have Christian world from Syria to Afghanistan.
And we'll have pagan religions from Britain and in most of the Eastern Mediterranean.
* My guess is that Christianity will definitely get Egypt (a lot of Jews and Greeks). And probably Macedon and other Greeks in the Balkans and Eastern Mediterranean - they might follow the pattern of Great Seulicides and Egypt.

MAlexMatt said:

Celtic civilization would survive a German conquest. It might even thrive.

Click to expand...

Ye, it might.
As I said Europe would be dominated by the Germans. And I did not say that the Germans would annihilate all the previous cultures and civilizations.
That would have been difficult as these nations had not been weakened by being closed inside a unified Roman Empire. Thanks God!

What of the Etruscans, and other Italics peoples?

Hispania? Britania?

Russian said:

And we'll have pagan religions from Britain and in most of the Eastern Mediterranean.

Click to expand...

So Europe will look more like India. Interesting.

Russian said:

Ye, it might.
As I said Europe would be dominated by the Germans. And I did not say that the Germans would annihilate all the previous cultures and civilizations.
That would have been difficult as these nations had not been weakened by being closed inside a unified Roman Empire. Thanks God!

Click to expand...

Well, I mean, just think in terms of the sheer physical wealth that was transported out of Gaul to Italy IOTL. ITTL, that wealth will remain in Gaul. It may belong to people speaking *German, worshiping *German gods, but it will be in Gaul.

The German conquerors will take the positions of the existing Gallic aristocracy and, over the course of generations, will assimilate into Gallic culture, leaving Gallic civilization as a whole far more intact than it emerged out of Roman domination IOTL. And it will probably happen far sooner -- a century or two instead of five.

Not that Germans won't dominate Europe for a time as you say. I can't argue against that and don't really disagree that it will happen. But it will be more like the Norman domination of England than like the English domination of Britain.

I could imagine the Etruscans, whatever Latins are left, and the Samnites to be used as a buffer by Greeks and Cartharge against the Celts and Germans. Unless the Northern Italian tribes ruin themselves first then they would probably be conquered by either or

The Ubbergeek said:

What of the Etruscans, and other Italics peoples? Hispania? Britania?

Click to expand...

In the 1 century BC Italy will be the worst nightmare of any supposed conqueror. Let us not forget that the roman Empire was created and fought over by Italian guys united by Rome. The Italians are warlike as hell.
Most of the time these boys will enjoy fighting each other. But if there is an invasion they all will happily cry out 'here's a new one!' and the intruder will get a all the consequences of getting into the wasp's nest.

Hispania will be Celt-Iberian-German and a little bit Carthagenian on top of this cake (maybe Carthage will occupy a few towns and castles, some of the places are extremely rich in gold).
I think Carthage will hold Iberian part of Gibraltar at any cost (the part that is owned by the British nowdays). For obvious reasons.

Britania? Britain is Celtic in 1 century BC, and it is German in 1 century AD.

MAlexMatt said:

The German conquerors will take the positions of the existing Gallic aristocracy and, over the course of generations, will assimilate into Gallic culture

Click to expand...

I am sorry to upset you, but even Cuimbry and Teutones were migrating in mass with their women and children. And they will not be the last ones.
The wealth you spoke about and fine lands would attract a lot of potential migration after the first hungry (bad agricultural) year in Germany.

So there will be assimilation, but it will be both ways. No doubt.

Russian said:

I am sorry to upset you, but even Cuimbry and Teutones were migrating in mass with their women and children. And they will not be the last ones.
The wealth you spoke about and fine lands would attract a lot of potential migration after the first hungry (bad agricultural) year in Germany.

So there will be assimilation, but it will be both ways. No doubt.

Click to expand...

No need to apologize.

There's just this demographic imbalance that I think you're missing: There were a LOT more Gauls than there were Germans. The Germans may take their wives and children but, as generations pass, they will become increasingly Gallic in blood and culture. There will be effects on Gallic culture, to be sure, but the over all civilization will retain its Gallic character.

MAlexMatt said:

There's just this demographic imbalance that I think you're missing: There were a LOT more Gauls than there were Germans. The Germans may take their wives and children but, as generations pass, they will become increasingly Gallic in blood and culture. There will be effects on Gallic culture, to be sure, but the over all civilization will retain its Gallic character.

Click to expand...

Ok, ok. Maybe you are right. But that might be several centuries after the Cimbri ans Teutones first came to non-Roman Western Europe. And after them other waves of the Germans.

But I am not looking that far. I am speaking about 1 cent. BC - 1 cent. AD.
And my guess that during this period of time in Gaul Germans will be Germans and Celts will be Celts. There will be some cultural and other borrowings, interaction and interpenetration.

And then in the end of 1 century AD a mighty united Dacian Empire arises. And maybe it would occupy Gaul kicking the Germans away. Or Dacia will push the Germans in Germany proper and they will run from them to Gaul.

The Ubbergeek said:

What of the Etruscans, and other Italics peoples?

Hispania? Britania?

Click to expand...

The Etruscans were already waning for a long time throughout the fifth and fourth centuries. They were also divided up into many city-states which makes it rather hard for them to unify. I always liked the Samnites personally.

I've always wondered on this, a classical world without Rome. A lot more variety of different civilizations scattered around the med. Could be rather interesting.

Russian said:

Christianity would definitely appear. How else?
It is a healthy mix of Jewish inspiration and Greek thought.

Click to expand...

But it would never have gone through the Bar-Kokhba's Revolt (a jewish-roman war) which had caused Marcion to write his gospel to separate christianity from greater judaism. It might exist, but only as a fringe group of judaism.